Testimony on Sponsorships in Parks
Submitted five minutes ago, so I plan to skip the morning classes at the Oregon Nurses Association convention in Eugene tomorrow morning in order to testify orally at City Council.
Dear Mayor Potter and Commissioners,
I appreciate Portland Parks & Recreation (PPR) bringing their Sponsorship and Naming policies to you for review. Administrative procedures and practices have been in place for many years, with approximately the content of the proposals before you on Wednesday morning’s agenda, with no public input or discussion. Bob Schulz of PPR is particularly to be commended for opening the policies up for review and your vote.
I support the Naming Policy, and ask that you adopt a version of it for all City properties, not just those owned by Portland Parks & Recreation. I particularly like its requirement of review by Neighborhood Associations and consideration by the Parks Board. Please don’t make any reductions in its mandates.
I am concerned about several aspects of the Sponsorship policy. It has been reviewed in only one public forum, at which there wasn’t consensus about its values or specifics. I would like you to direct PPR to spend more time engaging community groups and individuals, before adopting a revised version of the Sponsorship policy.
If you direct PPR to adopt it immediately, please ask for the following amendments:
1. Amend the policy statement to be clear the City is responsible for funding Parks adequately and equitably without relying on sponsorships.
I would like to see the Policy more clear in stating that sponsorships are secondary to the City providing adequate funding of Parks through the General Fund, by appropriate and fair levels of taxation of residents and businesses. The policy of the City should not be that begging from and offering incentives to corporations is a necessary component of the Parks budget. I would also add “increase equity” as one of the potential reasons to seek sponsorships. My amended Paragraph 1 of the Purpose would be:
“It is the policy of Portland Parks and Recreation to actively seek sponsorships for its services, parks, and facilities from individuals, foundations, corporations, nonprofit organizations, service clubs, and other entities. The purpose of such sponsorships is to increase supplement PP&R’s ability to deliver services to the community, increase equity, and/or provide enhanced levels of service beyond the core levels which should be adequately funded from the City’s general fund.”
2. State clearly that corporate logos are not allowed on parks facilities (as part of the infrastructure – on walls, scoreboards, courts, etc.).
The proposed policy defines “logo”, then is silent on whether logos are allowed or not. I believe they should not be allowed on parks infrastructure.
3. Change “will” to “shall” in the rule preferring off-site recognition for sponsorships.
“In recognition of a sponsor’s contribution, preference will be given to providing a form of recognition that is not displayed within parks” should be amended to state, “…. preference shall be given….”.
Thank you for considering my suggestions.
Respectfully submitted,
Amanda Fritz